Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2014 July 18

= July 18 =

Awk
Is there any valid reason why Awk (number) redirects to Large numbers? There's no explanation in the article. Rojomoke (talk) 09:58, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd guess because awk is able to handle fairly long numbers, it holds them in double precision float. But that's not a good reason for having that link so it should just be deleted. Dmcq (talk) 10:07, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Double precision float cannot compute N - (N - 1) correctly if N is Avogadro's number, so I'd say that awk doesn't deserve the redirect. (Neither is temporary real aka extended precision aka long double.) It would take a 79-bit significand to handle the "mol" version of Avogadro. Double and long double are still inadequate with 52 and 64 bits. - ¡Ouch! (hurt me / more pain) 12:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I found the redirect while looking for the AWK article, but I was wondering if there was a separate mathematical meaning to the term. Rojomoke (talk) 12:28, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Just seconding Dmcq, after creating the redirect the same editor made a bunch of test edits, so it appears to me that the redirect was one as well, which would mean a speedy delete is in order. I can't find any mathematical meaning for awk.--RDBury (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * In the future, this sort of notice would be better placed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. --Trovatore (talk) 18:21, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It wasn't a notice, it was a question. I wonder if the poster was thinking of the Ackermann numbers, a sequence which rapidly gets into very large numbers.  I think I've seen the word abbreviated as "ack", which might be confused with "awk". --50.100.189.160 (talk) 19:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It was a question, but not about math. It was more of a "what do we do about this page" sort of question, or at least that's my take on it.  Those are more wikiproject-like.  I don't want to belabor this; there was no real harm done.  I just want people to be aware that the wikiproject exists, and that this is the sort of thing it's there for. --Trovatore (talk) 20:10, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Nominated for deletion, although, as pointed out above, WT:MATH is a better place for the question or discussion. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:03, 23 July 2014 (UTC)